The Wisdom of
Humanae Vitaeby Father Jay Scott Newman

Editors note: Pope Paul VI's encyclical
letter Humanae Vitae (on the regulation of birth) was promulgated July 25, 1968.
TCA receives many letters about the Churches teaching on marriage and sexuality, one of
which is here printed at length because it is representative of confusion among Catholics
in the United States. With this answer to the letter below, TCA commemorates the 25th
anniversary of Humanae Vitae.

You
clergymen are a joke! Who are you -- the Pope included -- to tell anyone when
and what kind of birth control to use?

I am
40. I have two gorgeous sons. When the second child was born, I (for my own
personal and very seriously and prayerfully thought-out reasons) knew that my
family was complete. My husband was sterilized, and it was finished. Do you
think that I would want to check myself every single day of my life to see if I
am or am not ovulating? When are you clergymen going to get out of our beds?

My neighborhood is 90 percent Catholic.
Everyone quietly ignores you and prevents conception in the way he or she sees fit. We
receive the sacraments, send our children to CCD, and do what is best for us individually
and what is best for our families. Give us credit. We support our churches and our clergy
and many charities.

Jesus
never mentioned birth control in the gospels. Perhaps He realized that His
people would know when to reproduce and when not to. Yet all of you
clergy--including the Pope--insist on guiding us all in family planning and
lovemaking. Grow up!

Very
few people care what you think...Teach us about the Lord and trust us to know
how many children to have and when to stop and how to stop it. Until you have
practiced natural family planning, don't tell me how easy it is and how close my
husband and I will be for following it. These stupid rules will change because
we the people are Jesus' Church, not you the clergy.

On first glance, this letter seems to be about
artificial contraception. The Church teaches that the use of contraception, including
sterilization, to prevent conception is contrary to the will of God. The letter writer, on
the other hand, is certain that the Church's teaching on this matter is false, but she is
also concerned to show that, despite her disagreement with the Church, she remains a good
Catholic.

In her zeal to prove that she is right, the
author makes several observations and claims about the nature of the Church, alongside her
discussion of the teaching on contraception. The writer's own introduction of these
remarks gives testimony that neither her letter in particular nor the debate about
contraception in general is simply concerned with sexual ethics. Rather, this debate
ultimately raises these questions: What is the Church of Jesus Christ? What authority has
the Church to teach? So, before Christians can discuss the morality of contraception--or
any other moral question--we must first agree on what the Church is.

Jesus asked His disciples, "Who do you say
that I am?" Simon Peter replied, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living
God" (Mt 16:15-16). Here is the first direct declaration in the Gospel of the true
identity of Jesus; Peter calls Him "the Messiah"--the Christ, the Anointed One
of God. And in response to Peter's confession of faith, Jesus declares: "You are
Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld shall
not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in
heaven (Mt 16:18-19).

What are the ramifications of this exchange?
First, our Lord Himself is forging an unbreakable link between His Person and the Church.
When we confess Jesus as Lord, Jesus directs us immediately to His Church. Later, this
identification between Christ and the Church will become even more explicit. When Saul the
Pharisee was fiercely persecuting the Church, Christ appeared to him and asked:
"Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" (Acts 9:4). The lesson is as clear as
it was for St. Paul: Jesus Christ and His Church are inseparable.

The second lesson to learn from the dialogue of
Jesus and Peter is no less important. The Church founded by Christ is placed by Him under
the authority of Peter and the other apostles. The power of binding and loosing given
first to Peter for the whole Church is later extended to all the twelve for their
particular communities (see Mt 18:18). But what is this power?

Binding and loosing are technical terms
describing the power of rabbis to govern the people of God, and this power confers the
authority to rebuke the devil in exorcism, to excommunicate a sinner or heretic from the
assembly, and to make decisions binding the whole community. Jesus Christ entrusted this
same power to the apostles. But even this was not enough.

Our Lord commissioned His Church to go into the
world and continue His work until the end of time. To accomplish this task, He endowed the
Church, through the apostles, with His own messianic authority: "Whoever listens to
you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one
who sent me" (Lk 10:16). In other words, when we listen to the voice of Peter and the
apostles--or their successors, the Pope and the bishops--it is Christ Himself to whom we
listen. And conversely, when we reject the teaching of the Church and prefer our own
judgment to that of the Church's sacred teaching office, the Magisterium, it is ultimately
Christ Whom we reject.

This doctrine of Catholic Faith has important
practical consequences for us today. The writer of the letter quoted above asserts that
Jesus never mentioned contraception, and that is true. But neither did He discuss nuclear
weapons, abortion, surrogate motherhood, genetic experimentation on fetal tissue or any of
the other vexing problems confronting the world today. Does Christ's silence on such
questions in the Sacred Scriptures mean that there can be no definitive Christian judgment
on them? Would our Lord leave us without a reliable guide for making choices that can
affect our salvation? Not at all.

The Church speaks on earth with the same voice
and authority as Christ Himself and is able in every age to apply the principles revealed
by God to particular moral problems as they arise. And more than that, Catholics believe
that the Holy Spirit preserves the Church from error when she teaches on a matter of faith
or morals. In other words, the Church can teach infallibly, even on a disputed point of
morality.

The Second Vatican Council clearly teaches in the
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church that the Church cannot err in matters of belief (Lumen
Gentium, no. 12), but it is also clear that honest Catholics of goodwill frequently
disagree over matters of faith and morals. In such cases, some authority must resolve the
dispute if the authentic Christian answer is to be known. But how and by whom are such
decisions made?

The letter writer asserts that "we the
people are Jesus' Church, not you the clergy." Such a notion is clearly false. The
Church of Jesus Christ is composed of all the baptized, clergy and laity, who are now
living or have ever lived. It is the sacrament of Baptism that makes one a member of the
body of Christ, the Church, and this membership is brought to its fullness by the
sacraments of Confirmation and the Holy Eucharist. In this sense we are all one in Christ.

But within this unity, there is also diversity.
There are different functions for the various members of the body. By her nature the
Church is a hierarchical society, and the fundamental structure of this hierarchy was
instituted by Christ Himself. As Vatican II put it: "Jesus Christ...set up the Holy
Church by entrusting the apostles with their mission as He Himself had been sent by the
Father (cf. Jn 20:21). He willed that their successors, the bishops namely, should be the
shepherds in His Church until the end of the world" (Lumen Gentium, no. 18).

The Council explained in Lumen Gentium
that Catholics are obliged to follow the teaching of the Magisterium. Because this point
is at the heart of the debate over the Church's competence to teach about contraception,
it is well to hear the council at length:

"Bishops who teach in communion with the
Roman Pontiff are to be revered by all as witnesses of divine and Catholic truth;
the faithful, for their part, are obliged to submit to their bishops' decision, made in
the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals, and to adhere to it with a ready and
respectful allegiance of mind. This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be
given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even
when he does not speak ex cathedra..."(Lumen Gentium no. 25).

In other words, Catholics are obliged by their
baptism to accept and obey the teachings of the Pope and the College of Bishops on all
questions of faith and morals. Moreover, to refuse to accept the Church's teaching damages
and can even destroy the communion of an individual Catholic with the Church. Put
simply, by believing falsely or acting immorally, a Catholic can cease to be a Catholic
and place himself in grave spiritual danger.

So far we have examined what the Church is, how
she is structured, and why she has the authority to teach in the name of Christ in a way
that binds all the faithful to obedience. Now let us look at the teaching that is a
stumbling block for our letter writer: the immorality of contraception.

The first scriptural reference to contraception
is in the Old Testament, Genesis 38:9-10. The sin of Onan was his diversion of semen to
prevent conception, and this passage was invoked frequently by early Christian authors to
show that contraception is contrary to the will of God.

Then there are four indirect references to the
immorality of contraception in the New Testament. Galatians 5:20 and Revelation 9:21, 21:8
and 22:15 all condemn what is usually translated in English as sorcery. But the Greek
original in each case is a form of the word pharmakeia, practicing magic with
drugs. The connection to pharmacy is obvious, and the wickedness wrought by drugs in these
cases was the attempt either to prevent conception or to induce abortion.

The next written rejection of contraception by
Christian authority came late in the first century in the document called the Didache.
It was written at about the same time as the Gospels, but it was lost for several hundred
years. It was uncovered in the 1800s and is now recognized as an important and an
authoritative statement of very early Christian belief and practice, although its author
or authors remain unknown.

Then from the second to the fifth centuries, no
fewer than six Fathers of the Church--men noted for their personal holiness and the
excellence of their teaching--explicitly condemned all forms of contraception as contrary
to the law of God and the law of nature. St. Hippolytus of Rome, Clement of Alexandria,
St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, St. John Chrysostom and St. Augustine all taught unequivocally
that Christians were forbidden by God and their own nature to try to prevent the natural
consequence of sexual intercourse: the conception of a human child.

In the early-12th century, this teaching was
formally incorporated into Church law in the Decretum of Gratian, and Pope
Gregory IX (c.1170-1241) enacted universal legislation against contraception. It is also
significant that throughout the long theological controversies of the Middle Ages and the
Protestant Reformation, no theologian ever rejected or even attempted to challenge the
Church's teaching on the immorality of contraception. Finally, in the late 1800s, Pope Leo
XIII restated the constant teaching in his encyclical letter Arcanum (on
Christian marriage).

This brings us back to the 20th century. In 1930,
Pope Pius XI again condemned contraception in his encyclical letter Casti Connubii (on
Christian marriage). Then Pope Pius XII rejected the use of progesterone pills in 1958.

In response to inquiries about the status of Pius
XII's decision, Pope Paul VI said in 1964 that rejection of birth control pills was still
in effect but agreed to study again the whole question of the regulation of birth,
especially in light of rapid population growth and its attendant problems. The result of
that study was the encyclical letter Humanae Vitae. Since then, Pope John Paul II
has reaffirmed the Church's teaching many times, most notably in the 1981 apostolic
exhortation Familiaris Consortio ("Community of the Family").

In sum, based on both Sacred Scripture and Sacred
Tradition, the Church has taught from the beginning and without fail that any attempt by
any means before, during or after sexual intercourse which is specifically intended to
prevent the conception of a child is intrinsically immoral. This teaching is clearly
irreformable, and some theologians even argue that it is infallible. In any case, what is
absolutely certain is that this teaching is true and binds all Catholics to obedience. Let
us now see what this teaching means in greater detail.

That contraception is intrinsically immoral means
that the contraceptive act is immoral in itself, rather than made immoral by bad motives.
This means, moreover, that no good intention can ever make contraception good or even
morally neutral. It is evil in itself.

Next, all means to prevent procreation are
illicit. This includes temporary or permanent sterilization, chemicals (like birth control
pills or foams), mechanical devices (like the condom or diaphragm) or premature
withdrawal.

Of course here is the next question: Why is it
true that any and all attempts to prevent procreation as the natural consequence of sexual
intercourse are immoral? The answer is found in the purpose and nature of marriage and
human sexuality.

Marriage is a solemn and irrevocable covenant of
love between a man and a woman that was designed by God to be a profound and
permanent union ordered to their mutual happiness and to the procreation of children. This
covenant of love must be total, exclusive and permanent in order to be fully human, and
the sexual union that is the proper expression of spousal love must always remain open to
the transmission of life.

In order to understand why every act of
intercourse must be open to the transmission of life, one must remember that every
marriage involves not two parties, but three: the husband, the wife and God. God is the
Creator; human parents are procreators. For this reason, and because human life is an
absolute good to be desired for itself, no human person can arrogate to himself a decision
which belongs to God alone--when to give another human life.

One way of expressing this truth is to say that
every act of sexual intercourse must be truly unitive and procreative, in order to fulfill
the demands of human nature. If either or both elements are missing or damaged, then the
act of sexual love is more animal than human. Several examples will illustrate:

• Two people who are not married do not posses the
true communion of life that their complete surrender to each other in marriage
would bring. Therefore, if they have sexual intercourse, their bodies are
intimately connected, but their persons are not joined in a unity of life.

• A married couple who find that they cannot conceive a child even with medical
assistance resort to in vitro fertilization. They seek to make possible
procreation without the union of intercourse, which is the natural way designed
by God for the transmission of life.

• A married couple desires to have intercourse but, for whatever reason, do not
want a child to be the result of their love. They use contraception to make
union possible without procreation.

In each of these examples, the unitive and
procreative dimensions of human sexuality have been sundered by human will. When this
separation occurs, any act of intercourse that follows is objectively disordered because
some demand of human nature--given by God--is neglected or denied. Therefore,
contraception is always and everywhere immoral.

But this does not mean that the Church endorses
the unregulated birth of children or is not concerned with the potentially dire
consequences of irresponsible sexual conduct. Quite the contrary.

The Church teaches clearly that all people are
called to chastity, each according to one's state in life. For those who are not married,
chastity requires that they abstain from genital sexual behavior of all kinds. For those
who are married, chastity requires that they exercise their sexual powers in keeping with
the laws of God and nature. This means that unmarried people must learn to govern their
passions by self-denial and frequent recourse to the Sacraments of the Holy Eucharist and
Penance and that they must never approach their spouses as objects to satisfy lust but
always as partners with whom they cooperate in an essential work of marriage--the
procreation and education of children.

God has woven into the fabric of human nature
periods of female infertility that, with a little effort, can reliably be charted and
predicted. The Church teaches because these periods of infertility are the work of the
Creator, it is perfectly in accord with God's will for married couples to have sexual
intercourse during those times. Moreover, it is by making use of these infertile periods
that couples may responsibly regulate the birth of their children while still enjoying the
intimate union of spousal love which is a supreme good of their married life.

As we have already seen, Catholics are not at
liberty to decide whether or not to accept this teaching and remain Catholics. This is a
true teaching, and to reject this truth either in belief or action can damage or destroy
one's communion with the Church--and with God.

But though she rightly demands obedience, the
Church does not desire that Catholics simply accept this teaching on marriage and
sexuality without understanding why it is true. Contraception is not immoral because the
Pope says it is; the Pope says that contraception is immoral because it is. And it is
possible for human reason, aided by grace, to know the reasons why such behavior is
contrary to human nature.

Standing behind the teachings of the Fathers of the Church and of the popes on
sexuality and many other misunderstood Church doctrines is a profound Christian
anthropology worked out over 2,000 years. This wisdom is the product of human reason, but
it flows from divine revelation and is derived from what God has revealed to us about
ourselves.

Perhaps a fitting observance of the 25th anniversary of Humanae Vitae would be
to read a book or two on the Christian understanding of man. Before he became Pope John
Paul II, Karol Wojtyla wrote a book called "Love and Responsibility" (Ignatius
Press, 33 Oakland Avenue, Harrison, NY 10528) that beautifully expresses the wisdom of
Christian doctrine on family life and sexuality. His apostolic exhortation Familiaris
Consortio is also in print. (For information, write to the Daughters of St. Paul, 50
St. Paul's Avenue, Jamaica Plain, Boston, MA 02130.)

Another excellent book that lucidly explains Catholic doctrine is "Catholic Sexual
Ethics," by Father Ronald Lawlor, O.F.M. Cap., and Joseph Boyle Jr. and William E.
May (Our Sunday Visitor, 200 Noll Plaza, Huntington, IN 46750).

Finally, perhaps now is the time to read Humanae Vitae. A copy in pamphlet
form is available from both the Knights of Columbus and the Daughters of St. Paul. (For
information write to the Knights of Columbus, Catholic Information Service, 1 Columbus
Plaza, New Haven, CT 06510, or the Daughters of St. Paul.) It is a short document and can
be read in 30 minutes.

The deep compassion and profound humanity of Pope Paul VI shine through every word of
his much-reviled and seldom-read letter. For example, in his instructions to priests, he
writes: "Teach married couples the necessary way of prayer and prepare them to
approach more often with great faith the Sacraments of the Eucharist and of Penance. Let
them never lose heart because of their weakness" (Humanae Vitae, no. 29).

I suspect that a little time spent with this beautiful exposition of the Church's
teaching on marriage and sexuality will help every reader understand more fully why
"in preserving intact the whole moral law of marriage, the Church is convinced that
she is contributing to the creation of a truly human civilization" (Humanae
Vitae, no. 18).